The Miyawaki Method: A Better Way to Build Forests? (2019)

- Yes, you generally try to use native species only. Search for things like the WWF ecoregions map to get a broad idea, search for a local resource on native species.

- The reason it grows a bit faster isn't magic - it involves a higher input effort/cost, and you skip a stage of succession by focusing more on planting 'keystone species' rather than going through an initial stage of 'pioneer species'. - Because of this, they tend to be more attractive in urban environments. See also related organizations like "tiny forests" https://www.ivn.nl/tiny-forest/tiny-forest-worldwide (netherlands), https://theotherdada.com (beirut), more listed on https://www.afforestt.com/about. You do need a minimum width/length to implement, and may need to dig the soil/amend the soil to deal with urban-area compaction.

- The most actionable things you can do is:

   - got money? Right now (temperate winter here) is a good time to plant native saplings if they're not sold out. You may even find some folks 'salvaging' native plants from areas where land is about to be cleared for construction.

   - setup a tree nursery. Native saplings can be expensive

   - try things in a small way, tell your neighbors, start mutual learning.

- If you're going to have a dense forest, you need a plan for maintenance so you don't end up with woody mass building up to cause a fire later on (see millan millan's papers "greening and browning in a climate change hotspot". You might be able to partner with a local businesses, school, government, etc. to find a spot & help with expenses/maintenance

Instead of the usual mass mono culture plantations that are cost effective and easily doable, we decided to do something different. Here's a couple of things we did:

1. Use native species 2. Instead of a blanket plantation of rows of trees, landscape a more natural habitat. This included, a dense canopy, a meadow and some sparce shrubbery all on different areas of the lot. 3. Include plants that provide food and shelter for native fauna, even if the plants weren't native. 4. Landscape a little to allow for water retention 5. Focus on soil improvement in the beginning

We did a few more things to ensure high survival rate, but that's probably not of interest. The results were amazing. Our section was the one with the most promising results. Our lot grew like a natural habitat in the 2nd and 3rd year in a way that you'd never feel that this was a barren piece of land. And eventually, some of the species started spreading to the nearby lots as well. The other lots didn't do so well, some of them had survival rate of about 30-40%, but a lot of them ended up more like less than 10%. Mind you, we are talking about 40C+ summer temperatures.

https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/for-the-love-of-peat/

EDIT: This is not to say that trees should not be planted. I wrote the post in support of using science and nuance to plant trees the right way, which I think is the major point of the article.

Any planting of new forest is to be applauded, but(at least where I live) this is an unrealistic approach.

We have 10 acres (about 4 acres) of land that we have mostly replanted. I've learnt a bit in the process.

1) watering everything is not feasible. We're on tank water, and each summer ends with me policing the lengths of family showers. This southern hemisphere summer, we added one more 25kl tank (several $k) just for plant watering. It barely scratches the surface.

2) weeding is unpleasant and hard work.I struggle to get any help with it. In practice, spraying is the only practical approach, not ideal environmentally.

3) the profile of species that thrive is changing, right before our eyes last summer was brutal and we lost several big trees probably 50+years old in the heat.

While this article's approach is an interesting one, I would say it's is suited to a very compact environment, such as one might find in japan.

At a larger scale, a less intensive approach is to plant semi-intensively mainly in pioneer species. Planted in the autumn or spring, these will survive without watering.

These form a thick forest that prevents weed growth underneath. You have now reached a stable point - you can now leave your forest to nature. Birds will drop seeds, and those seeds will germinate beneath the pioneer canopy, letting the larger species come through and eventually replace the pioneer species.

If you want you can accelerate the process by planting large trees here and there within the pioneer canopy. But again, that won't require watering or weeding.

Key to it is using native species, and picking species that will survive at higher temperatures.

Being in the southern hemisphere, that means species that are commonly found in the north, where it is hotter already.

That's in the majority of places where trees would normally grow. Of course in some ecosystems like a full desert, we can help nature do it's thing. And we can also help along the natural process by selectively planting additional species. In the US tree planting is about foresty not nature or the environment. Forestry is the planting and managing trees for economic gain, usually for pulp or lumber often by planting only one or two species.

So, another misleading thing would be that forestry involves planting several times as many trees and then weeding, culling, thinning out the trees. So one misleading statistic you will find is something like "we planted 1 million trees", where the actual number of trees finally will be something like 100,000.

Trees come with their own built in reproductive system via seeds, acorn and the like. The urge to plant forests is a human urge to meddle and fix things. This urge is also the reason why the forests were cleared and nature curtailed. This urge should, in most of the world, be resisted if we are to let nature do it's own thing.